10

I want to get into programming on old MS-DOS systems, before then going to older DOSs like CP/M. However, while programming for MS-DOS I'd like to also use era-appropriate software, both for the writing of the code and the compiling of it.

The system I was planning on writing it for is an IBM 5150 Computer, ideally, I'd want to be use assembler as the language of choice.

And I know there were many programs that allowed you to compile assembler, and even more to let you write text. However, I was hoping to get some real recommendations on software from people that were there. So, to anyone who was developing software for the 5150 at the time, what programs were your go-to's at the time?

Please excuse my poor grammar English is not my first language- I'm sorry if this question was too broad, was hoping to get some advice on just starting out :/

7
  • 9
    I never had a 5150, but Turbo Pascal was a really nice development environment for early IBM compatibles. Definitely my go-to for development at that time. And you can also use Turbo Pascal on CP/M.
    – dirkt
    Oct 20, 2022 at 20:39
  • I never used the 5150, but I did use a DEC VAXmate (which was an x86, not a VAX; marketing, sigh). I don't recall thinking about it much. Microsoft C and whatever text editor was available. CASE tools were a thing of the future.
    – dave
    Oct 20, 2022 at 21:55
  • 2
    This is kind of chicken and egg problem. Tools and compilers were used on other computers to make the BIOS and OS of IBM 5150, so likely the first programs were also made like on other platforms, before tools and compilers were available on the IBM 5150. See 8086 family reference manual what tools Intel provided on which platforms to make 8086 software.
    – Justme
    Oct 20, 2022 at 22:14
  • 1
    @wizzwizz4 Fine, opened: <retrocomputing.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1151/15334>. Oct 21, 2022 at 5:17
  • 1
    By the way, questions like this are permitted on Quora. You don't always get as good answers as here but there are less restrictions. Polling, opinions, subjective questions, list, all OK there. Oct 23, 2022 at 3:42

11 Answers 11

13

Turbo Pascal 3.0.

It is hard today to understand how much a revolution it was to go from something that required writing your source file to diskette, exiting the editor and running first the compiler and then the linker to get an executable which you ran from the command line and then back into the editor, to something where everything could fit in the RAM you had.

You could literally run your code in seconds!

The compiler stopped at the first error situation so you still get that retro-feeling. You will want to get the accompanying book as that's the language reference. The download at https://edn.embarcadero.com/article/20792 does not include the manual.

If you want to fast-forward a bit, Turbo Pascal 5.5 was really nice. Had objects and a debugger. The debugger could even use a second monitor if I recall correctly.

(Turbo Pascal was also available for CP/M - the sensation was even more impressive there)

(Turbo Pascal was an adapted version of the Danish PolyPascal. If you can get hold of that the editor is much, much better!)

1
  • Absolutely Turbo Pascal! Version 3.0 came if Wikipedia is correct in 1986, thats when I got my first IBM Copy with dual floppys. Hard-disk came later. I worked 6 years with 68000 development before that. A short while we used a Multics system for text editing, later VAX. Compiling, Assembly, Linking on a connected Motorola 68K dev system and then transfer to our test rigs (intended for real-time control). It could take many hours for a small change to propagate to the test system. What a relief Turbo Pascal was!
    – ghellquist
    Oct 21, 2022 at 11:08
6

Microsoft’s macro assembler. Because that was the only way of ensuring that all the bugs in the final product were mine.

3

I used (and loved) a text editor called Qedit as my development environment. Somewhat to my surprise it still exists.

I wrote in Microsoft assembler and Microsoft C, though mostly in assembler as in those days C wasn't fast enough to do what I wanted. I used the Microsoft debugger though I remember it with little affection.

3

The toolset used definitely depended on the kind of software people were developing:

Small, local, and more ad-hoc programs were built using tools like TurboPascal and various Basic compilers. C was not that widely used in such developments as in the early days, suitable C compilers weren't really available, and C was largely considered an exotic "Unix thing". This area is probably the one that will recall most of the personal insights, but it's maybe not 100% representative.

Large-scale, more "professional" development for, say, world market software products (think WordPerfect, VisiCalc, WordStar...) was done using different tools. Note, in the early days of the IBM PC, suitable C compilers were not available, WP, for example, was entirely written using MASM. MASM was thus, in a way, the main development tool for the first years of PC software. Later on, the platforms for large-scale SW development changed onto C compilers (MS, Lattice, Watcom). TurboPascal and Basic were not very prominent (i.e., not at all) in this world. Multiplan was actually one of the first to be developed in (some sort of) C.

2

I used a few things back then:

  1. QuickBasic, starting with version 2.0
  2. Turbo Pascal 3.0
  3. MSC, version 2.0, eventually moving to...
  4. Borland C++, version 3.5
1

Microsoft's BASIC, but I don't remember the version or other details. It was set as requirement for some paid work as a student on university.

The 5150 provided even had a hard disk, 10 MB or so. Wow! I still have its keyboard, for unknown reasons. Recently I built an adapter to connect it via USB to any modern computer.

Good thing that this time did not last for long. :-D

1

For period-appropriate software, start with the Microsoft assembler and Lattice C, later distributed as Microsoft C 2.0. Other early C compilers I used were Aztec C and Wizard C, which seems to have disappeared from history.

For editing, I used WordStar in non-document mode, although many different editors were available.

1

Borland Turbo BASIC. I created a very extensive customer management system for a tour operator that ran on an XT clone with 10MB HD & 640KB RAM.

The system issued hundreds of checks & invoices weekly and was in continous use for seven years.

I remember utilizing CHAIN statements to minimize memory use and it worked like a charm - the client was VERY happy...

1

Depending on the specific project, I initially tended to use Multi-Edit as my program editor, and wrote code in GW-BASIC (either interpreted or using the Microsoft or IBM BASIC Compiler) or Pascal (Microsoft or Turbo compilers). Later, QBASIC/QuickBASIC was added to the list, and occasionally Modula-2 (Fitted Software Tools compiler) or Euphoria (initally from Rapid Deployment Software, later OpenEuphoria).

1
  • +10 For using Multi-Edit :))
    – Raffzahn
    Oct 21, 2022 at 11:35
1

gwbasic, Turbo Pascal 3 and 4, dBase III replaced quickly by foxbase and masm.

That's more or less all I've used on my XT PC (PC-Speed emulator on Atari ST). Later on 386 PC at work, Microsoft C 5.1, 6.0 and 7.00 and a little bit of Borland and Watcom C.

1

In my first professional programming gig in the 80s I was developing on Toshiba laptops (very nice for the time).

I was using the Aztec C compiler and the Vitamin C libraries which provided very basic window-like features. And I mean VERY basic window-like features. Not actual windows.

I typically wrote the code using vi on a mini-computer (a dual Unix universe Pyramid box) and used kermit to transfer the source code to the Toshiba for compiling.

On the laptop itself, I did play around with microEMACS, but as I had used vi throughout my undergrad career I ended up sticking with vi.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .